On Sunday, May 04, 2014 02:22:16 PM Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Sunday 04 May 2014 12:37:02 J. Roeleveld wrote: > > On Sunday, May 04, 2014 09:53:35 AM Peter Humphrey wrote: > > > On Saturday 03 May 2014 23:04:49 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > > > > I spent nearly the whole day digging around this issue ... > > > > > > You did better than I did recently: I spent four days at it. > > > > For mission-critical systems, I would have done a clean re-install already > > with data copied back from a backup. More then 24 hours is a deadline. > > That's what I was doing when I discovered the IRQ16 misbehaviour. After that > it was a matter of finding the cause. As it happens, it went away again by > itself. Makes me wonder how much more life to expect from this motherboard. > > --->8
Not necessarily a dead motherboard. Not gotten round to replying on your email in that thread yet, will do so in a few moments. > > I used to have a howto bookmarked that gave more detail then the current > > step- by-step examples. Unfortunately, that whole website disappeared > > about > > 5 or 6 years ago. > > > > Maybe check the old thread where Dale started with LVM. There is a lot of > > detail in there. > > Hmm...don't remember that. I'll see if I can find it - thanks. > > --->8 Let me know if you have difficulty locating it, I might be able to find the actual date/time of the first post for you. (Or even forward the whole thread in a zip-file directly to your email if requested) > > > As far as I know, the only thing that /requires/ an initramfs is having > > > a > > > separate /usr. And I can't help you with GPT or UEFI - sorry. > > > > A seperate " /usr " or " / " on LVM. > > Oh yes, of course. I missed that one. I shouldn't have, because that's the > reason my / is on RAID-1 but not LVM - to avoid needing an initramfs. I figured that as I am forced to redo my machine with an initramfs anyway, I might as well put "/" on RAID as well. That's why I had "/usr" seperately in the past, so I had that part on RAID+LVM and still able to boot. That's a use-case that is no longer accepted as "normal" -- Joost
